WYGANT+v.+JACKSON+BOARD+OF+EDUCATION

D **. Boeck **   U.S. Supreme Court  **WYGANT v. JACKSON BOARD OF EDUCATION, 476 U.S. 267 (1986) ** **476 U.S. 267 **  **WYGANT ET AL. v. JACKSON BOARD OF EDUCATION ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

No. 84-1340.

Argued November 6, 1985 Decided May 19, 1986 **   **Background: ** ** A school system had a collective bargaining agreement with a teachers union that predetermined the strategy for layoffs if they had to occur. The strategy was for seniority to have precedent when it came to decisions about who will be laid-off. The school allowed for some minority teachers to stay in place for quotas to be maintained and to be examples for minority students, while more senior non-minorities were terminated. The senior non-minorities sued claiming discrimination. ** **Decision and Rationale: ** ** The lower courts found that the decision to keep on the less senior teachers to maintain examples for minority students was justified. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court which then reversed the decision. They stated that by keeping “Blacks” to teach “Blacks” that the lower courts were in violation of Brown vs. school board and unconstitutional. The plaintiffs were reinstated and layoffs were based solely on seniority. ** **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;">Implications: ** **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;"> The double standard of trying to keep minorities in the employ of the education system can cause injustices to be delivered to innocent victims. The reverse discrimination felt by the teachers who were illegally terminated is a real possibility for all teachers today and it is an ****<span style="font-family: 'Arial Rounded MT Bold','sans-serif'; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;">a **<span style="font-family: 'Arial Rounded MT Bold','sans-serif'; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;">ction that all parties must guard themselves against. The standards by which a school system operates should be equal for all parties <span style="font-family: 'Arial Rounded MT Bold','sans-serif'; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;">Question **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 8pt; line-height: 115%;">: Is reverse discrimination illegal? True/False **

Michael Mooney

**WYGANT ET AL. v.** **JACKSON** **BOARD OF EDUCATION ET AL.**
 * CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT**

A collective bargaining agreement was reached between the Jackson School board of Education and the teacher’s union that stated if layoffs were necessary then the procedure would be based upon seniority. The exception to the proceedings would be that at no time would there be a greater percentage of minority personnel laid off than the current percentage of minority personnel employed at the time of the layoff. When lay-offs at the school occurred, some highly seniority based non minority teachers were let go while some minority teachers who had less seniority kept their jobs. The non minority teachers filed suit but their case was not victorious and the district court sided with the school district. After an appeal process, the court of appeals upheld the constitutionality of the decision. Both courts agreed that the racial preferences granted by the Board need not be grounded on a finding of prior discrimination but were permissible under the Equal Protection Clause as an attempt to remedy societal discrimination by providing "role models" for minority schoolchildren. The Supreme Court reversed the decision by the lower courts and sided with the plaintiff non minority teachers. The Supreme Court did not uphold the same logic used by the lower courts which said they had to keep the less seniority minority teachers to provide good role models for the minority children of the school. The Judges of the Supreme Court stated, “Carried to its logical extreme, the idea that black students are better off with black teachers could lead to the very system the Court rejected in Brown v. Board of Education.” There must be sufficient evidence justifying the conclusion that there has been prior discrimination in order to enact such a layoff that the school district did. The Supreme Court cited the case McLaughlin v. Florida, 379 U.S. 184, 196 (1964), which discussed promoting racial equality in the work place but did not address the hiring and firing of employees already established. To truly make the point in their case the court used Steelworkers v. Weber, 443 U.S. 193, 208 (1979) which stated, “The plan does not require the discharge of white workers and their replacement with new black hirees"). In cases involving valid hiring goals, the burden to be borne by innocent individuals is diffused to a considerable extent among society generally. Though hiring goals may burden some innocent individuals, they simply do not impose the same kind of injury that layoffs impose. Denial of a future employment opportunity is not as intrusive as loss of an existing job.” This case is a sign of positive for teaching in general. The backing of the court for any case involving discrimination of any kind is a strong precedent to fall back to. Discrimination is not only for one race or another or one religion or another or one anything or another; it is a crime that can affect any group. Seniority should be looked at with high esteem, not disregarded just to keep the social efforts in line. Teachers and the teaching profession in general can feel more at ease even if something bad happens to them knowing that justice and the logic of our courts will eventually win out. **Question:** Can the Equal Protection Clause be used as an attempt to remedy societal discrimination?
 * Background:**
 * Decision and Rationale:**
 * Impact on Teaching:**